User talk:Siguard

Keep up the good work
Been seeing you in my watchlist! I just wanted to say nice job on reconciling all the different pages to one another, especially where I have failed to do so (e.g. I didn't know it was common to categorise all of the traits until very recently). It's nice to see someone who is focused on the consistency of appearance, too, as - for a change, on wikis - we have as much content as we do mess, and fixing both are equally difficult jobs!

But yep! Keep fighting the good fight! You're not unappreciated! Luke (talk) 03:30, 2 March 2016 (MST)

SLINav
For SLINav, The psychological holoprogram does use the Case File artwork in-game, not the holoprogram artwork. --Eeb3 (talk) 13:40, 8 April 2016


 * Oops, sorry about that Eeb3. I fixed that error. --Siguard (talk) 13:52, 8 April 2016 (CDT)

Typo?
I could be wrong, but I think in your latest data addition to The Mad Vedek DropTest, you may have forgotten to add your additional runs along with the rewards data. It's returning an Error 1 at the moment so something doesn't add up. Cpt nichols (talk) 13:43, 18 June 2016 (CDT)


 * Youare correct. I fixed it. --Crunch (talk) 17:53, 18 June 2016 (CDT)


 * Damn, Sorry guys. That bloodwine sure has a kick! ;) --Siguard (talk) 08:45, 19 June 2016 (CDT)

DropTest Table
Note that the percentage values will be (slightly) off for missions that drop 2 or 4 items per run (such as Internal Dispute, Behind Closed Doors, A Tale of Forgotten Lore/1), unless you also provide the |perRun= parameter for these. The chrons/unit values are unaffected by this. --Crunch (talk) 18:24, 23 June 2016 (CDT)

Please, check droptest table after editing to prevent this from happening. ;) --Koba44 (talk) 12:50, 27 July 2016 (CDT)


 * I found it and fixed it --Siguard (talk) 13:02, 27 July 2016 (CDT)

You've been audited!
Just wanted to let you know that I found this edit where you added data to Crunch's area instead of your own. Looking at the raw data, you later re-added the data to your own area, so that one run was duplicated. I undid the change you did to crunch's values without adding them to yours for that reason. Please double-check your records in case my decision was incorrect. — CodeHydro (msg) 06:59, 27 June 2016 (CDT)
 * Total hell! I'm usually really careful about which data I add. I really do worry about messing up that data. It's super useful. Good catch.--Siguard (talk) 09:19, 27 June 2016 (CDT)
 * No worries, I've messed up in the past before too. We're all human. This is why I'm taking the time to do this audit. Actually in looking at the edit history, I find you're doing a great job segregating sources where new testers fail to use expr tag. PS: You may be interested in this soon-to-be-released feature. It may take me a few more days...  — CodeHydro (msg) 13:21, 27 June 2016 (CDT)
 * Yeah, that's awesome. I'm trying hard to resist just going ahead and using it, heh.--Siguard (talk) 16:03, 27 June 2016 (CDT)


 * I apologize for the delay in releasing the DropTest update. Still have a lot of auditing to do and probably won't have time until after the event. As a consolation prize, I present Template:Icons ;) — CodeHydro (msg) 14:46, 2 July 2016 (CDT)
 * ...I'll except it ;) PS, I love the way you started out that template description. "Just because [you] hates manually typing things."--Siguard (talk) 13:50, 5 July 2016 (CDT)


 * So, is there anything I can do to help make this auditing process faster for you? I'm too excited about the DropTest update.--Siguard (talk) 14:27, 11 July 2016 (CDT)

"Revert to original contributor order"
Hiho. I noticed your latest change to Template:DropTest/Long Distance Call/1 where you "reverted to original contributor order". Just to elaborate on this: I believe CodeHydro was the one who tried to keep the order in the past according to "most runs per contibutor". Not sure whether he's still doing this, due to the sheer amount of DropTests, and the negligible benefit of going through the effort and re-arraging all terms without making a mistake. For me, I personally don't care about the order. But you are the first one I saw who tries to keep the chronological(?) order intact? IMHO that's not worth the effort.

So maybe it's worth documenting somewhere what the majority agrees the order should be? But again, I personally don't think it's worth the effort, because re-arranging the order (no matter according to which rule) is a lot of work, and error prone. Just saying. --Crunch (talk) 15:30, 12 July 2016 (CDT)
 * Yeah, it's a pain. I'm going though and auditing the DropTest for CodeHydro (I wasn't asked, I just want to make things easier for him), and started re-arranging according to first come first listed. I'm starting to say, "F all this" and am making sure people are editing their data/not combining two people's data together. I'm being extra careful, don't worry about that.--Siguard (talk) 15:36, 12 July 2016 (CDT)

Thanks for the effort! I can't wait either to start integrating the new feature on all item pages, to be able to see at a glance where the best chances are. --Crunch (talk) 15:46, 12 July 2016 (CDT)
 * ;-D


 * Thanks sig, you have been a great help! A draft of the new guidelines is located at Template:DropTest/doc which clarifies that the guideline regarding byline order is a "right" not a rule, though it is still recommended that the top 4 contributors be among the first four credits. Speaking of the new draft guidelines, that is the real reason I'm here... right now the only reason I have not made the new droptest update live is because I am dissatisfied with the guidelines I've drafted for the new Adjustments parameter. You've audits a bunch of droptests so you've probably seen many of the mistakes/bad data entries that may happen. If you could talk a look at the new guidelines and offer some feedback, it would be great. The trouble with developing guidelines is that they have to be strict enough to prevent the majority of bad data, but not so strict as to make it too much of a burden to contribute/learn the rules. There is also the problem of wording it in a concise yet clear manner. Over-explaining things means that people will simply not read them, but under-explaining would mean people won't understand them... Feel free to edit the draft guidelines directly. If I disagree I can always revert using the page history ;) Thanks again! — CodeHydro (msg) 11:31, 22 July 2016 (CDT)
 * Do you think you could take a look or do you think the draft guidelines are fine? — CodeHydro (msg) 11:23, 25 July 2016 (CDT)
 * Sorry, Got a little too caught up with the Event and going to see the movie this weekend. I think the guidelines look good. I'd be a little careful about adding the adjustment parameter. It's a nice feature to have, but if Error 3 Messages start popping up everywhere it might have to be axed. Otherwise, it's good. You're doing good work.--Siguard (talk) 15:29, 25 July 2016 (CDT)
 * Thanks! Yeah, we'll have to see how what happens. I have revised the guidelines once more and now feel that they are adequate if not satisfactory. New DropTest will be released momentarily ;) — CodeHydro (msg) 12:13, 26 July 2016 (CDT)
 * Just thought I might throw in my opinion as well: IMHO that adjustment parameter is way too complicated for 99% of all users, and not worth the hassle. You write, the reason is to "avoids creating sampling gaps" - but that's de facto impossible: if you received a rare item, you ALREADY have a sampling gap, due to one item missing. IMHO, the most reasonable approach is to simply skip any runs with rare items altogether. A sampling gap is only a problem if you make a conscious decision about whether to include a run or not ("ah, I didn't get my item, I won't log this run"), which would skew the result. A sampling gap is NOT a problem if the reason for omitting it is completely unbiased (such as the random event that you received a rare item). To add another argument: including runs with rare item might even be a BAD choice, because the actual distribution of items might already be skewed for these, depending on how they implemented it. --Crunch (talk) 19:22, 26 July 2016 (CDT)

Ship Abilities
Thank you for adding all the ship abilities (=battle actions) to the ship pages, that was important, missing info! However, at the moment it somewhat destroys the formatting of these pages and wastes a lot of vertical space: Could you please improve that? For example, Thanks! --Crunch (talk) 08:14, 17 July 2016 (CDT)
 * The boxes are below each other, as opposed to next to each other.
 * You now have to scroll down to actually see the table of contents, as the Infobox is no longer side-by-side with the main content of the page (=previously the Advancement table)
 * The boxes themselves are very dominant/large with lots of whitespace
 * The TOC should always be on top, otherwise its purpose is somewhat defeated
 * I agree that the abilities should come before the advancement table - the latter is not really that important, as it's rarely used.
 * It would be great if the size of the abilities can be reduced until up to three fit next to each other (using an invisible table, or a wikitable, as somebody already has done here: U.S.S. Defiant), while still fitting the floating infobox to the right of them.

ItemPage Template
It is unnecessary to add the category links to the page, since the ItemPage template does it automatically. It makes sure that it will only occur for pages on the main namespace, not the template namespace. (which causes bloated Item/Equipment/Component category numbers) =/\= Eeb3 (talk) =/\= 10:59, 3 August 2016 (CDT)
 * ...huh, neat. ok.--Siguard (talk) 11:04, 3 August 2016 (CDT)

Koloth
Hi there! I noticed you added L.10 values for Koloth. The proficiency change for DIP and SEC is due to DB's massive rebalancing yesterday, so that's fine. (The COM values should not be affected for him). However, according to the listed items, he should gain a total of COM(0-8), DIP(0-8), and SEC(0-0) between L.1 and L.10. So there is COM(0-4) missing (which matches his L.1 uniform). Can you still reproduce this, or did you already advance him? Thanks! --Crunch (talk) 11:26, 18 September 2016 (CDT)


 * I have him one item away from lvl 20, but doing the back calculations from where I am now to where he should have been at 10, those are the right proficiencies. --Siguard (talk) 13:39, 18 September 2016 (CDT)


 * Ah, the Klingon Armor (TNG) doesn't have COM, but the Klingon Armor (TOS) has. Maybe he was using the TNG one at L.1 as well? --Crunch (talk) 15:54, 18 September 2016 (CDT)


 * I'm thinking he was. I'll keep an eye out for him with future crew packs to make sure. --Siguard (talk) 09:01, 19 September 2016 (CDT)

I thought that was you! Yeah I don't know what I was thinking earlier, as I can obviously just copy the code, and after pasting it on my own page it will update whenever the source table is updated. And I completely appreciate the Deal or No Deal calculation as well. DB is in the habit of a lot of no deals. :-)

Thanks again!

--&#124;&#124;&#124; DJH &#124;&#124;&#124; (talk) 13:26, 27 September 2016 (CDT)

KlingonArmorTNGFlip
Hiho. I noticed you added flipped versions of KlingonArmorTNG (for example, File:KlingonArmorTNGFlipRare.png, which was used for Kruge's Armor. Due to the mirroring, the borders look weird. Note that with the ItemPage template, uploading flipped versions is no longer necessary - just provide a non-empty  parameter, which will automatically flip the image using HTML methods. Cheers! --Crunch (talk) 16:11, 10 October 2016 (CDT)

Crafting Table images HELP
I have a question hoping you'd be so kind to help me with it. I have uploaded a few images (uniform, ancient weapons and communicator) from Captain Pike but they do not show up in his crafting table so I'm clearly doing something wrong. --Otto VonBacon (talk) 11:14, 6 January 2017 (CST)


 * I responded on your talk page.--Siguard (talk) 11:33, 6 January 2017 (CST)

Awesome thanks, I responded there to your question...--Otto VonBacon (talk) 11:56, 6 January 2017 (CST)

Just one more... Can you do the same for the Captain Pike's Ancient Weapons crafting table. I do not know how to change what you did. --Otto VonBacon (talk) 12:01, 6 January 2017 (CST)